isn't it peaceful?, page-32

Not quite sure what your point is?

I believe AUT has been successful as an oil company because they have managed to increase production. In this context I have no problems with companies spending cash - AUT have increased their production rate over 3 fold in the last 12 months. The issue with MAD is they are burning through cash without increasing production. It's fine to spend it drilling exploration wells, but if you can't support that expenditure with cash flow from operations that makes you an exploration company.

It really helps if you provide all the facts and context otherwise you are in danger of misleading people:
1.) I quoted AUT and AZZ in the context of what production gains can be achieved when companies have reserves. I did not quote either as an exemplar of what an oil company should be
2.) Even if I did cite AUT as an exemplar, including undrawn loans in capital is misleading. It simply means the banks are lining up to lend AUT capital (an endorsement of their assets) AUT have not drawn or spent it

Prima facie AUT are producing 3 times more hydrocarbons than MAD for every $ of equity spent. For record I am not long AUT or AZZ.

As with your oil price post, it pays to include all the facts rather than just the ones you feel support your case.

Short